Stephan Kulow napsal(a):
Am Mittwoch 19 März 2008 schrieb Lukas Ocilka:
What do you think of that? Is there a better way than check against PDB? Webpin?
Well, you can add all these packages as either requires or build requires to yast2-build-test.spec (remember arch specifics) and you end up in the same list that the packagers get complains from.
And yes, it's only against STABLE, but we don't drop or rename packages in released products, so it doesn't matter.
Now that extra-packages is machine readable, we could automate the change on every edit. But at first we need to cleanup the current mess, as every maintainer will have to check if the module really tries to install autofs4.
Well, first it should be said why we have different RPM Requires and BuildRequires. * Some packages are in BR but not in R - They are needed just to build the package because ... hmm, that sounds rather like an error, doesn't it :)? * Some packages are in R but not in BR - Of course, you don't need to install all packages when building the YaST package. It makes the build faster. Of course, if you don't care that BuildRequires will contain 'ALL' packages listed in Requires, we would just simply change the 'make package' command to add everything from 'Requires' to 'BuildRequires'. It would be 'Fast but Furious (II.)' ;) Lukas